Germany: the Act to Improve Enforcement of the Law in Social Networks
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Germany: The Act to Improve Enforcement of the Law in Social Networks August 2017 Germany: The Act to Improve Enforcement of the Law in Social Networks Executive summary In August 2017, ARTICLE 19 analysed the Act to Improve Enforcement of The Law in Social Networks (the Act), which the Federal Council (Upper Chamber) of the German Parliament approved on 7 July 2017, and is expected to be published in the Gazette shortly. The Act will enter into force on 1 October 2017. ARTICLE 19 analysed the earlier draft of the Act. ARTICLE 19 is deeply concerned that the Act will severely undermine freedom of expression in Germany, and is already setting a dangerous example to other countries that more vigorously apply criminal provisions to quash dissent and criticism, including against journalists and human rights defenders. The Act establishes an intermediary liability regime that incentivises, through severe administrative penalties of up to 5 million Euros, within time periods of 24 hours and 7 days respectively. As regulatory offences, it is possible for the maximum sanction to be multiplied by ten to 50 million Euros. Though the Act does not create new content restrictions, it compels content removals on the basis of select provisions from the German Criminal Code. Many of these provisions raise serious broad concepts of amation and insult. Deputising private companies to engage in censorship on the basis of these provisions is deeply troubling, as they should not be criminal offences in the first place. We are particularly concerned that the obligation to remove or block content applies without any prior determination of the legality of the content at issue by a court, and with no guidance to Social Networks on respecting the right to freedom of expression. Such private enterprises are not competent to make these complex factual and legal determinations, and the Act provides no recourse to users whose content is blocked or deleted unfairly. Though the Act creates a system - bodies for unlawful content , this recognition is conditional and held by an administrative body not insulated from political influence. The likelihood of Social Networks being over-vigorous in deleting or blocking content is compounded by the legal uncertainty pervading the Act. content removal and blocking processes will be considered systemic enough to attract administrative liability is unclear, and ambiguity in the definitions of key terms (including of is likely to create an environment wherein lawful content is routinely blocked or removed as a precaution. The -regulation limited oversight provided by the Administrative Courts does nothing to address over-blocking, and provides little protection or due process to Social Networks that in good faith refrain from blocking or removing content in the interests of respecting freedom of expression. Summary of recommendations 1. The Act should be repealed, with consideration given to retaining Section 2 on reporting requirements in alternative legislation to increase transparency around online content moderation by private actors; 2. The German Criminal Code should be comprehensively revised to remove offences that are not compatible with international human rights law on freedom of expression, including but not limited to those listed in the Act. ARTICLE 19 – Free Word Centre, 60 Farringdon Rd, London EC1R 3GA – www.article19.org – +44 20 7324 2500 Page 2 of 25 Germany: The Act to Improve Enforcement of the Law in Social Networks Table of contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 4 International human rights standards .............................................................................................. 5 The right to freedom of expression ............................................................................................... 5 The right to equality ................................................................................................................... 6 ...................................................................................................... 6 Obligation to prohibit .............................................................................................................. 6 Permissible limitations ............................................................................................................ 8 Lawful expression ................................................................................................................... 8 Freedom of expression online and intermediary liability ................................................................. 8 Self-regulatory models for social media ...................................................................................... 11 Analysis of the Act ....................................................................................................................... 12 ........................................................................................................ 12 .................................................................................................................. 13 Handling complaints about unlawful content .............................................................................. 16 Processes for complaining about unlawful content ................................................................... 16 Removal and blocking ........................................................................................................... 17 -regulat ........................................................................ 20 Reporting requirements ............................................................................................................ 22 Individual responsibility for offences committed online ............................................................... 22 Amendments to the Telemedia Act ............................................................................................ 23 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................. 24 About ARTICLE 19 ...................................................................................................................... 25 ARTICLE 19 – Free Word Centre, 60 Farringdon Rd, London EC1R 3GA – www.article19.org – +44 20 7324 2500 Page 3 of 25 Germany: The Act to Improve Enforcement of the Law in Social Networks Introduction In this legal analysis, ARTICLE 19 reviews the German Act to Improve Enforcement of the Law in Social Networks (the Act)1 for its compatibility with international human rights law. According to the Act, it will enter into force on 1 October 2017. ARTICLE 19 previously expressed serious concerns with earlier drafts of the Act.2 This analysis is an update to our analysis of the previously published Bill, pointing out significant differences that were made in the later stages of the legislative process. to those concerns,3 we reiterate in this analysis why, notwithstanding changes made, the Act . ARTICLE 19 has extensive experience in analysing laws pertaining to the right to freedom of expression online,4 The issue of intermediary liability for content created by third parties is a recurring issue and an area where we see increasing pressure on private companies to control information flows. Recently, we have expressed concerns at attempts in this regard at the European Union level,5 which the Act emulates and expands upon. Our policy position on this is . 6 The types of content limitation foreseen in the Act 7 defamation,8 and national security.9 The Act imposes duties on them, inter alia, to adopt particular complaints procedures regarding content that violates provisions of the German Criminal Code, to delete or block access to that content, and to report on their practices in this regard periodically to administrative authorities. Failure to abide by these conditions results in the imposition of severe administrative fines. This analysis sets out relevant international human rights law standards before examining the main freedom of expression concerns raised by the Act. ARTICLE 19 finds that the Act does not comply with international human rights law, and recommends its full repeal. We also urge the German Government to bring its legislation into full compliance with international freedom of expression standards, in particular the Penal Code, and we stand ready to provide further assistance in this process. 1 This analysis reviews a consolidated English version of the Act. The analysis assumes the differences between the English and German versions of the Law reflect errors in the English version. In the English version, Section 1(3) omits a reference included in the German version to Section 201(a) of the German Penal Code. In numerous provisions, the term in German - - - responsibility for the accuracy of the translation or for comments made on the basis of any inaccuracies in the translation. 2 ARTICLE 19, Germany: draft bill on social networks raises serious free expression concerns, 26 April 2017 3 The government of Germany responded to a series of criticisms offered by multiple freedom of expression and 4 See, for example, ARTICLE 19, Myanmar: Telecommunications Law, Legal Analysis, March 2017. 5 ARTICLE 19, EU Commission Code of Conduct for Countering Illegal Hate Speech Online and the Framework Decision, June 2016. 6 ARTICLE 19, Internet Intermediaries: Dilemma of Liability, 29 August 2013.